The American media is very primitive, which is why it avoids complex and important issues, and instead resorts to tabloid topics like sex scandals. While their country is embroiled in an unprovoked war in Iraq, occupies Afghanistan (along with Canada), and itches to bomb Iran for oil, they’re worried more about where the wiener Petraeus has been.

It pretty much doesn’t matter, and it’s par for the course, yet it’s popular to talk about because it involves powerful people being shamed. It’s not exactly Wikileaks’ level of interesting, yet it will lead to many old stories being looked at in a slightly new, sexy light.

So far it only offers scant hope to Republicans that they can somehow embarrass Obama or impeach him over an unrelated event in Benghazi, Libya, and a shirtless FBI male agent whose photo was published today with shot-up dummies. No photo bombing, or anything remotely interesting. Expect this scandal to blow over in a month if no new tie-ins are made.
—

When I saw the trailer for Argo, I had a flashback to the Tommy Douglas Story. It was obvious from the focus of the plot that the CIA was going to get credit for saving the American hostages in Iran, 1979, instead of Ken Taylor, the Canadian diplomat.

That’s the problem when you let Americans write history with semi-fictional blockbusters.

Besides monitoring the Yes Men, Amnesty International, and a swath of international media and activist organizations, Stratfor fancied itself as a superior intelligence agency, better than the FBI anyway. Here’s their Glossary entry for FBI:

Federal Bureau of Investigation, aka the Downtown Gang. Very good a breaking up used car rings. Kind of confused on anything more complicated. Fun to jerk with. Not fun when they jerk back.

Here are some clipped thoughts on the upcoming War in Iran (that is already underway to some extent):

On 11/14/11 9:10 AM, Fred Burton wrote:

Guerrilla actions behind enemy lines.

If we think the Izzies [Israelis] have set back waiting on Iran to create a bomb we are like the CIA with their inability to predict just about anything.

Check INSIGHT I posted last week that everyone discounted. How come if its not in OS we nash our teeth? Intelligence agencies exist to have sources. That is what we are.

I think the info that Fred sent in previously needs to be looked quite seriously here.

The insight seems like quite a stretch however it has been put out there for some reason or another and is now playing in to what we are seeing.

Insight below:

Source below was asked to clarify his remarks that the nuclear infrastructure had been destroyed. Source response:

Israeli commandos in collaboration with Kurd forces destroyed few underground facilities mainly used for the Iranian defense and nuclear research projects.

Despite the reports in the media and against any public knowledge, the promoter of a massive Israeli attack on Syria is the axis India-Russia-Turkey-Saudi Arabia. The axis US-Germany-France-China is against such an attack from obvious reasons. Not many people know that Russia is one of Israel’s largest military partners and India is Israel’s largest client.

If a direct conflict between Iran and Israel erupts, Russia and Saudi Arabia will gain the advantages on oil increasing prices. On the other hand, China and Europe are expected to loose [sic] from an oil crisis as a result of a conflict. Based on Israeli plans, the attack on Iran will last only 48 hours but will be so destructive that Iran will be unable to retaliate or recover and
the government will fall. It is hard to believe that Hamas or Hezbollah will try to get involved in this conflict.

In the open media many are pushing and expecting Israel to launch a massive attack on Iran. Even if the Israelis have the capabilities and are ready to attack by air, sea and land, there
is no need to attack the nuclear program at this point after the commandos destroyed a significant part of it.

If a massive attack on Iran happens soon, then the attack will have political and oil reasons and not nuclear. It is also very hard to believe that the Israelis will initiate an attack unless they act as a contractor for other nations or if Iran or its proxies attack first. With the revealed of the new UN report the Israelis have green light to take care of the Iranian proxies in
Gaza and Lebanon now with the entire world watching Iran. I think that we should expect escalations on these fronts rather than an Israeli attack on Iran.

On 11/7/11 8:09 AM, Chris Farnham wrote:
Ah, what? Israel has already destroyed the Iranian prog/infra and this is all being engineered by Europeans so people forget about the economy crisis?!

These people spell lose as loose, and Israelis as “Izzies”. Can we believe anything they say?

“I’ve watched and listened to what the leadership in the Iran regime says, and it frightens me,” Mr. Harper said in a CBC interview.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper takes a serious matter, and turns it into an opportunity to help his oil buddies. Bruce Carson would be so proud of him (if Harper hadn’t thrown the illegal oil lobbyist, and former Harper insider, under a bus before the last election).

It is entirely plausible that Iran’s theocratic, and vehemently anti-Israeli government, would be a threat to peace if they got nuclear weapons. Then again, the unstable states of North Korea and Pakistan both have them, and years later nothing has gone baa-boom. Why the focus on Iran? It’s oil production is huge. What’s vile, is that Harper diminishes the threat of a nuclear armed Iran by linking it to a his failing energy policy based on greed, and bad business and environmental sense. He’s so eager to ship our brains out to China, that he doesn’t seem to care what ducks and bunnies he has to step on to get there.

“In my judgment, these are people who have a particular, you know, fanatically religious worldview, and their statements imply to me no hesitation of using nuclear weapons if they see them achieving their religious or political purposes,” he said.

Remember that the only state to use nuclear weapons in an attack, is the USA, even though Pakistan and North Korea have had them for years now. What he accuses the Iranian regime of, is not far off how many people view Harper’s government (minus the nukes). The Conservatives have shown time and again that they are willing to make Canada a global pariah to make a petro-buck. Ecology, and science, and human rights be damned.

Military action has been discussed, Mr. Harper added. “President [Barack] Obama’s said all options are on the table and I can certainly tell you that, when we talk about these issues, we talk about the full range of questions around these issues.
“I’ve raised the alarm as much as I can, but obviously I don’t advocate particular actions publicly. I work with our allies to see if we get consensus on actions,” he said.

Also during the interview, Mr. Harper linked the debate over the controversial Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to Texas with concern over Iran’s threat to blockade the main shipping route for oil in the Middle East.
“It’s pretty obvious what the right decision is … not just from an economic and environmental standpoint, but from an energy security standpoint,” Mr. Harper said.

Disappointingly (but not surprisingly) his next words did not contain “become renewable energy world leaders”. Instead he thinks we need to put the people of BC, and our coastline at grave risk from a catastrophic oil slick in the Pacific (as well as the rivers and lakes along the way from Alberta). Using warmongering, just like the kind used against Iraq 9 years ago, to bolster support for an invasion “achieving their religious or political purposes”, is in Harper’s words “frightening”. He just doesn’t see how black his pot is while pointing at the Iranian kettle.